mark kibort

wow, thats kind of a slap in the face of all the POC cars in all classes that couldnt get around this "water buffalo" at laguna, 7 years in a row.
what ever it takes to win.

But, I have a hard time understanding your logic. I think most non drag'er guys, call all things that run down the track with 800 to 8000hp dragsters, but heck, that really isnt the point is it.

onefastviking

Thats one of the big problems that everyone tries to get you to understand Mark.

You take things that are totally different and try to make them the same.
Automatic transmissions and CVT as an example. Autos,Manual,Sequential transmissions ALL have specific gear ratios, the only difference is how they shift them. A CVT is continuously variable, it has a specific hi and low max and never shifts just varies between the high and low.
How you could ever suggest that an automatic "relates", or "looks to act like" a CVT or IVT is ridiculous.

More to follow later tonight when I have time.

mark kibort

I told you, I dont know how the details of how automatics work. I know it is fluid coupled, at the torque converter, and then i guess it then uses tradition gears and thats about it. I thought the drag transmissions did something that was not using traditional gears. I understand CVTs, IVT, sequentials, manual and automatic, etc. I only made a comment of that the hydromatic transmissions of the dragsters. (meant, non clutch type power transfer) might reduce the HP loss that a manual transmission has, and provide effective gearing in the fluid transfer. Like I said, I dont know how they work. I never tried to make the two the same. never meant it or said it. The dragsters vs funny cars vs prostock, etc, yes, i lumped them together.
The point was, I thought there was some gearing changing made by the fact that the tires grow substantially with speed. maybe this growth happens he moment they blast the gas, so it is a non factor. (gearing wise)

A more polite response would have been; " NO, dragsters , use clutches, while the other drag cars like prostock use the automatics. They have slip and really dont have any gearing effects". That is how I would have answered it. But, you have the double standard and thats fine. Just realize it!

Matt Romanowski

No, drag race cars typically use standard transmission. Prostock cars use an air activated shifting system while top fuel and funny cars have single ration transmissions and slip the clutch a ton.

And 928s still suck.

mark kibort

Thanks Matt. Like I said, i have no clue other than here is lots of smoke and fire with drag cars and dragsters. power is amazing! so much, that it melts the plugs after one run. current to run the ingition was enough to light up a city.

Bottomline, getting back on topic, that really wasnt a topic at all. HP determines acceleration at any speed. (even though it doesnt create the torque, its an indicator of what the torque will be at the wheels at any speed . Hows that! ) flat torque curves are a misnomer in racing. they all fall off and the only thing a flat hp cure will do, is provide more mid range torque, so its actually better. as a goal, yes, thats what we all strive for. a flatter HP curve. we cant ever really get there, usually, but unless you can just make more hp peak, its a way to get more hp-seconds out of your engine at the track.

There you go..

Mark

by the way, if you think the 928 is still a water buffalo. ( I know you were joking to make a point, but still, maybe you might like it after seeing this video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftyeZc4Hlok

Matt Romanowski

Dude, I haven't read all of your diatribes, but what you just wrote is *** backwards. HP is calculated from torque, so there never will be a time where

Jay Gratton

Matt, you kill me dude! You are a funny bastard!!!!!

It is because of posts like Mark's is the reason I rarely visit this forum anymore.

mark kibort

yes, hp is torque and speed multiplied together. I didnt say ANYTHING about what came first. It can be a philisophcal debate. I wont even go there

but if you have a set of torque curves and HP curves, you can just look at the HP curve to determine shift points and even optimize your thrust curves as well . calculating them by using torque curves is just harder, and it certainly has no bearing on what comes from what. we all know F=ma But, we also know acceleration=power/momentim. So, if we look only at HP curves, you are just using curves that have twice as much information. thats it.

people talk of flat torque cures, etc. I have never seen one that is flat, plus if you boost up the lower end torque, to gain more usable HP. to gain more aveage hp , the torque curve is a falling line. give me a set hp value, and I want a falling torque curve, dont you??

Matt, you dont get it! if you have a peaky hp curve. (flat torque curve), then you dont have much midrange torque to the wheels. actually its equal from pre to post shift. if you were to boost mid range torque, HP would increase in this area and become flatter. for a given HP, this is better. you want a flatter hp curve! you want it because your area under the HP curve will be greater. this will provide better acceleration. does that make sense. if you have a flat torque curve, your pre and post shift HP is grossly different. That is common, but not desirable for a goal. a flat hp curve would give the same effect as an IVT or CVT, with the only draw back being shift time.

Matt, explain to me why you say this and the prior post is backwards??? do you not think that a flat hp curve will provide more mid range torque compared to a flat torque curve?? is this what you are saying? If so, you are dead nuts wrong. again, acceleation is proportiaonl to power at any speed. It doesnt matter the fact that torque and RPM give you the mesure of HP. we are talking thrust force at the driven wheels! if you EVER have the same HP as someone else anyhwere on the track, at any speed, you will accelerate exactly the same as the thurst force will be exactly the same (ceterus paribus)

winders

Mark,

Yes, if you have a limit on horsepower, it would be best if the motor made that horsepower at all RPMs. That's not going to happen though.

Most people are not building motors with some horsepower limit restricting them. In other words, they are trying to get as much horsepower out of the motor as they can while keeping it reliable.

In series where there are horsepower limits, those limits are usually set near what the motor used could expect to make if built relatively well. In other words, no series out there with horsepower limits uses a motor that is readily capable of making X horsepower yet mandates X * 0.7 horsepower.

You have created some fanatsy world for your concept of a flat horsepower curve. Whereas this flat torque curve concept with a lot of area under the torque curve is a well established concept.

Scott

mark kibort

wheew, it sounds like you get me now! now, so you agree that it would be ideal to get a flat HP curve if there was a limit in HP. Good, thats my main point. The reason for this is to keep mid range torque high or higher. flat may not always be possible, but the you want the curve to be as close to flat as possible, even though it might not be possible. a flat torque curve, however means a rising HP curve that rises at a 45degree angle, right? this means if it was flat, you would have post shift HP of way less. so, engine builders build in more RPM capability to take advantage of the extra hp up top. keep in mind when you peak hp torque is now falling, when its on the back side of the HP peak, the torque is plunging! yet, you use the car past peak hp to redline for the reason of maximizing the averagine of the power. this means by definition, you are using the engine in the flat HP range, or as flat as possible and in the falling torque range, or as falling as much as possible.

before you respond, find a GT3RS curve (the most high performance of all porsche curves) and see what it looks like. compart it to the street GT3 and see the differences. usually , it has higher RPM capabilities, and a wider HP curve up top so post shift doesnt end up at the flat torque area of the curve.

you say, most series dont have cars build with engines with ".7 x max Hp potential". really?? ever see or hear what the 7 liter corvette engine makes for ALMS? why do you think they use restrictors? those motor can make near 800+ hp easilty, but they use them in the 500 to 600hp range all the time. Right, they use restrictors to limit top end power and not sacrafice lower end power as much. in otherwords, flatten the HP curve out.
Its also the reason that GTS series in nasa averages torque when higher than HP, and not when its lower. (key point) I was a part of this process in the early stages of the rule making.

now you say, flat torque curves are an established concept. trust me, anyone with a flat torque curve (meaning skyrocketing HP curve) would give his left nut to flatten the hp curve out at the cost of the shape of the torque curve. it makes perfect sense. porsche has done this with many models with their Heimhotz resonator modifications so that they can boost up mid range torque.
F1 limits HP peaks, nascar speedGT, touring, GTS, PCA now, all of them use peak HP and restrict from there.

Anyway the point is, we use HP because it has some math done already in the term. every thing Ive posted is true and correct. I dont want to debate if power creates torque, as Ive had this discussion with my physics profs 20 years ago, after class. I would say that fuel is the potential energy, it has a power potential. HP is the rate of doing work and work is equal to energy, ( edit: not same as) and HP -seconds is a unit measure of work. so, like a batter capactity, it has the abiltiy to dictate how much work can be done and at what rate. the physics forum guy, didnt like that. he was a torque purest and says, power is calcuated and the force is what does the work. I have no arguement there. where we miss each other is using something that is already calculated or present, to determine shift points in a variable non constant jerk, force, speed limited power source, that is quite unique to the physics world for modeling.

anyway, my only point is not what came first. my point is that if you have power curves , you can look at them and adust/tune/gear to maximize the power potential and utilization. if you have power curves, you can calcuate shift points extremely easily, taking no less than 2 steps out of the process, PLUS you can eyeball answers to questions that cant be found looking at a set of torque curves. thrust curves yes, but HP curves provide the idential information. it will be as correct and easier to work with.

as a side note to your point about series limiting engine output , etc. a great example was the audi Diesel. 820ftlbs of torque! 600hp. 5 speed vs 6 speed of their competitors. why, a broad HP curve, using all tha torque, at very low rpm creating more average HP than the high strung "fat torque curve" gas engine competitors. they loved their falling torque curve. LOVE IT. it allowed them to shift at 6000rpm and end up post shift at the same hp, eliminating the need for the extra gear and close ratios. so, its not fantasy land. some folks, smarter than us, figured out a way to do it and still meet the restrictions of the rules for equality.

winders

You are so full of it......Do you really think that just because you write a zillion words you are going to be correct? You pull out exceptions and present them as mainstream.

You are not worth having a discussion with and I am not going to do it anymore. I am done with you...

Scott

quickxotica

To save everyone the trouble of reading all that, here are the gems:

Happy Friday!

mark kibort

I only write enough to make the point. you made several claims that were just not true. If you have such a lack of attention, then i guess you shouldnt be be discussing these concepts. most cannont be explained in a single sentence. Actually, this entire concept CAN!

Now, if you understand this, here is the answer:

Acceleration (ability to accelerate a mass) = (equals) Power (can be HP) / (mass x velocity) or also called momentium.

Thats it! If you get this, you understand acceleration is proportioanl to power at any speed. increase power at any point on the HP curve, and you increase acceleration at that speed. (and yes, torque at the rear wheels will increase as well, as they are inextricably tied together )

that should be an ah ha moment IF you understood the concepts. since you clearly dont, it will go right over your head, whether its a 500word response or a simple equation.

Mark

mark kibort

Ill make it evern easier.

here is the point of all this. a V10 vs a F-6 GT3RS dyno run.

Do you see any flat torque curves? i think they both look pretty flat to me. the bulbus viper curve looks beter to me, even if they could be adjusted for both to have the same HP peak. again, porsche got this and tried to flattened the hp curve by raising mid range torque with resonance intake effects.

look , work is not eactly energy either. I miss spoke, energy changes form whe work is produced and the units are the same. Point is, hp-seconds is a unit measure of work and it can be useful to look at when deciding on shift points and projected engine performance.


here are the viper with GT3rs curve graph and a GT3 graph with torque. looks like they all run mainly on the downward slope of the torque curve to me.

Eric_Oz_S2

I can't believe you guys are still going.

Read this:

http://autospeed.com/cms/title_Power...8/article.html

I'll visit again tomorrow to see if anything has changed.

Eric